You're rihgt: nHits - nHits == 0 :)
But I did the right tests - it just happened that I've sent you a wrong
source.
I mean I performed the tests accessing the proper last doc: doc(nHits - 1)
then I switched to accessing the first hit, just to make sure (once again)
there is essential difference in access times.
And instead of wiping out the code fragment (nHits - 1) and replacing it
with 0, a replaced 1 with nHits.
That's how the resulting (nHits - nHits) code got posted.
Yes, the index is stored at a local hard drive.
Stenly
----- Original Message -----
From: "Doug Cutting" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Lucene Users List" <lucene-user@jakarta.apache.org>
Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 8:15 PM
Subject: Re: Fast access to a random page of the search results.
> Stanislav Jordanov wrote:
> > startTs = System.currentTimeMillis();
> > dummyMethod(hits.doc(nHits - nHits));
> > stopTs = System.currentTimeMillis();
> > System.out.println("Last doc accessed in " + (stopTs -
> > startTs)
> > + "ms");
>
> 'nHits - nHits' always equals zero. So you're actually printing the
> first document, not the last. The last document would be accessed with
> 'hits.doc(nHits)'. Accessing the last document should not be much
> slower (or faster) than accessing the first.
>
> 200+ milliseconds to access a document does seem slow. Where is you
> index stored? On a local hard drive?
>
> Doug
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
